Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
asterism said:Define luxury.
How much money per year do you think this tax will raise?
Do you think world hunger is due to a lack of money?
I only have a rough idea of the definition, which is things we don't need. But the exact definition, as in what should be taxed, should be up to a bi-partisan panel.
As for how much we would raise, I can't give an accurate statistic since I haven't defined what is going to be taxed, but this statistic places the amount of money we spend on non-essential goods at 1.2 trillion, so 5% of that would be... now that I calculate it, too much, a lower tax would be safer and not unnecessary, and after a less expensive proof of concept on top of that, like a successful relief of a poverty stricken city.
I would say weak economies and droughts, but I would also rather defer to the World Food Programme
How we can fight world hunger? Quit making fuel out of food.
You could be making this up for some scam you're running or perhaps you just don't think numbers very important. They are, and let's work together with them a bit. A lot of sources say there're about 7 B people in the world. You're saying less than a billion are starving while other people say there are more than to billion while still others say "No one really knows how many people are malnourished."
If you don't care about numbers and you want my money for this, then I'll give you $100, or maybe I'll give you $1, or maybe we can take a deep breath and do the hard work of taking on reality here.
Your saying I'm trying to scam you???? How would I even do that, I'm not asking for your money at all I'm just trying to get feedback on a rough plan I came up with in high school. I have no way of benefiting from it.
Here is where I got that statistic
Overall, you know there are millions of people starving so why hold back because we can't get an accurate statistic?
Can't you at least give me some reasonable feedback? Could the idea work? Are the economics it's based on wrong?
A proposal for a 5% luxury tax for world hunger charities
asterism said:Define luxury.
How much money per year do you think this tax will raise?
Do you think world hunger is due to a lack of money?
I only have a rough idea of the definition, which is things we don't need. But the exact definition, as in what should be taxed, should be up to a bi-partisan panel.
As for how much we would raise, I can't give an accurate statistic since I haven't defined what is going to be taxed, but this statistic places the amount of money we spend on non-essential goods at 1.2 trillion, so 5% of that would be... now that I calculate it, too much, a lower tax would be safer and not unnecessary, and after a less expensive proof of concept on top of that, like a successful relief of a poverty stricken city.
I would say weak economies and droughts, but I would also rather defer to the World Food Programme
Where do i say its wrong to help people? However....it IS wrong to FORCE (tax) people into YOUR morality.
The hard reality here is while I don't want to see people in Africa starving, I don't want to starve myself. My first responsibility is feeding MY family. If you really want to help starving people, there are private charities that you are free to donate as much as you can to.
Quite frankly, my charity is generally local. The welfare of those in my community comes way before an concern for people thousands of miles away, living under corrupt, oppressive dictators who will simply use the world's largess to enrich themselves and solidify their control
Where do i say its wrong to help people? However....it IS wrong to FORCE (tax) people into YOUR morality.
Have we never taxed for the greater good, even when a minority disagrees? We give money to governments thousands of miles away so that they can defend themselves, why is it such a large stretch to give food to people to feed themselves? We will lose nothing of value and do a lot of good, how is that not worth it?
Here is what pisses me the hell off about the bleeding hearts who want to cure wold hunger.
What the hell about the hungry and needy right here at home. When we no longer need food pantries, soup kitchens, homeless shelters.... then we can think about taking care of the world and their crap.
if the idea of a luxury tax is going to be floated... that money damn well be spent right here in the good old USofA before we start being doing anything for anyone else.
Here is what pisses me the hell off about the bleeding hearts who want to cure wold hunger.
What the hell about the hungry and needy right here at home. When we no longer need food pantries, soup kitchens, homeless shelters.... then we can think about taking care of the world and their crap.
if the idea of a luxury tax is going to be floated... that money damn well be spent right here in the good old USofA before we start being doing anything for anyone else.
We already have programs and charity here to take care of our hungry. While there may be trouble finding food no one starves to death.
How many people starve to death in America every year
the greater good .... of THIS country...sure.
So the military aid we give out is for the greater good of us?
We will lose nothing of value and do a lot of good, how is that not worth it? Answer.
So money isn't the solution.
It is part of it.
How we can fight world hunger
and make up your mind here will you
is it god...nature...or something moral.
As an agnostic, I accept that we can't know whether it was god or nature (nature as in godless evolution), and morality is not a cause. But that really doesn't matter. Why is it wrong to help these people if we just have to pay more for luxuries?